Say hello to your first 7-9 playoff team

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 2, 2011, 11:58 PM EST

The worst playoff team in NFL history played its very best game on Sunday night.

Complain about Seattle’s 7-9 record and the quality of the NFC West all you want. We won’t argue. Just recognize that the Seahawks came up big in their biggest game with their backup quarterback at the helm.

Charlie Whitehurst threw for 192 yards with a touchdown on 32 attempts in a 16-6 Seahawks win over the Rams Sunday night. Seattle’s league-worst running game put up 141 yards on the ground, while the defense held Steven Jackson in check.

Rams rookie quarterback Sam Bradfordstruggled all night. The Rams only had 63 yards of offense in the second half and 184 yards in the game. Danario Alexander dropped a pair of deep passes, and Bradford’s rough stretch run continued with an ugly fourth quarter interception.

The Rams won’t get a playoff game after this surprising 7-9 season, but it doesn’t matter. They are the only team in the division with a franchise quarterback and they get a much better draft pick now. (Seattle falls from No. 8 to No. 21 at best. The Rams get No. 14.) Unless the goal is to lose in the first round, this Rams loss wasn’t a killer.

The most lasting impact of this game: It could inspire the league to seed non-bye teams by record in the future. There is significant league support for such a measure. In that alternate universe, the Seahawks would be visiting the New Orleans next week.

Instead, it’s reversed. A banged-up Saints team has to travel to the West Coast on a short week. Matt Hasselbeck could be healthy enough to start at quarterback, which figures to be a story all week.

Another story: Could the worst playoff team of all time become the worst team to win a playoff game?

It’s doubtful: Even the 12th man couldn’t keep Seattle competitive against teams like the Chiefs, Giants, and Falcons at Qwest Field.

For one night at least, the Seahawks can say they played their best when it mattered the most.

If the Yankees make playoffs with best record, and Red Sox make wildcard and have worst record, they are not allowed to play each other in the first rd, because they are in the same division. Is that fair?

All u re-seeding promoters can pipe down.

Beat out 3 teams, and you host a playoff game. Win your division. Nice wildcard records, who cares? You couldn’t beat out 3 teams in your division. That simple.

Can’t stand seahags, however I have a feeling next weeks game will not go the way the “experts” on ESPN, Fox, NBC or CBS say! Look for a 3-6 point low scoring game!

deadmanwalking47 says:Jan 3, 2011 12:03 AM

i believe in parody,but having a sub 500 team in the playoffs,makes the nfl look like idiots!i hate the giants,but they deserved this,the bucs deserved this,a lot of teams deserv ed this over the seahawks,and they even get a home playoff game!unreal!!!

littlesparkplug says:Jan 3, 2011 12:04 AM

nfl.com’s playoff schedule realease states every teams record except for the seahawks

Predict a very similar outcome as the first game in Week 11. Saints by 2 touchdowns. Even with their inconsistent play, the Saints can beat the Seahawks, easily. The Seahawks should NOT be in the playoffs, rather the Bucs and Giants are much better teams. It is a shame a losing record team is allowed to be crowned a Division champ…

And in related news: The 10-6 Giants and Bucs will watch the game from home. What a joke!

jeffperk says:Jan 3, 2011 12:19 AM

Wow, & my 12-4 team has to go on the road for round 1, nice! Funny watching the Seahawks wearing NFC West Champion swag, how embarressing for the NFL

dirtdawg55 says:Jan 3, 2011 12:20 AM

Congratulations Seahags. You are the biggest losers. If that was “coming up big” in a game that matters I would hate to see you at your worst. Pitiful game by two pitiful teams. Lucky for the Seahawks the Rams can’t catch.

After watching my 49ers stink in the shameful NFC West all season, a 7-9 team rep’ing it is appropriate. At least when they change the playoff format after this abomination, the rule will be known as the “Seahawks Rule”!

That is funny. You can tell the league is embarrassed by this. I hope it’s enough to force them to make changes in the offseason. It’s just absurd that an 11-5 team has to go on the road against a 7-9 team in the playoffs. Not to mention the fact that a 7-9 team is in the playoffs to begin with.

timstl says:Jan 3, 2011 12:27 AM

Hat tip to the officiating crew. They really stepped up (down?) to make tonight’s game one all-around clown show. Ugh. That was painful to watch.

I think all this re-seeding c$%^ is just that. They tried to do it after Arz went to the Superbowl. They have brought it up everytime the Seahawks have made the playoffs. Why do we need to do it? Is it really any worse then a 11-0 team having to travel across the country during the regular season? Maybe we should just move all the teams to the East coast maybe that would make everyone happy…

Stop complaining about the rest of the league… Just cause the hawks finished 7-9 doesnt mean they cant beat that garbage ass saints team! Seattle has been an up and down team this this year, I hope they’re on there up and shut you haters up!

marcinhouston says:Jan 3, 2011 12:30 AM

I don’t know what is lower, the NFC West sending a 7-9 team to the playoffs in the NFL or five Big Ten teams getting bowl bids the day before based on the past reputation of their conference and all losing, with the Big 10 looking at a 1-8 bowl record when Arkansas beats Ohio State. I am not sure either even deserves an automatic bid.

Beer Cheese Soup says:Jan 3, 2011 12:35 AM

This is a complete embarrassment and a black mark on the entire league. If there was ever a time to restructure the playoff system, this is it.

Only in Seattle could this happen. First team ever to win a Super Bowl and have the win awarded to their opponent, first team ever to retire a number for.. nobody, first team ever to make the playoffs with a record that would have otherwise gotten them a top ten pick.

Up next: first team to lose a playoff game by over 80 points. They’re gonna need to pump in the Qwest artificial crowd noise even louder this week…

edgarpoe2 says:Jan 3, 2011 12:38 AM

Even if the Seahawks get lucky and go all the way to the Super Bowl, it is a disgrace, because they shouldn’t even have had the chance. A 7-9 team should never be allowed to advance when two 10-6 teams stay home.

Throw the records out the window, ladies. Someone had to win the division, and the Seahawks won it. Division champs. Who gives a crap about their regular season record. Bring on the Saints. Congrats to Pete Carroll! Scoreboard.

cover2blitz0 says:Jan 3, 2011 12:45 AM

hello to being the biggest joke of an nfl divison champion ever and keeping a far more deserving bucs team out

pftrumors says:Jan 3, 2011 12:45 AM

I knew the Seahawks would give the Rams hell at Qwest. Going into the game my gut wanted the Rams win a playoff spot. But Qwest Field is a tough place especially for the Rams.

Bradford lacks options and experience. No one misses Mark Clayton more than Sam. Laurent Robinson is a pitiful option. The Seahawks were ferocious at neutralizing Stephen Jackson. Receivers other Big Mike Williams stepped up for Seattle. Plus, Pete Carroll and the Seahawks had one of best games of this season.

The Pats won 11 games a few years back and didn’t make the playoffs. What could ya do? And I’m a GIANTS fan. One year you are 10 and 6 and win the SuperBowl another year your team is 10 and 6 and ya don’t qualify for the playoffs it just happens. Its Football

Hey, the Browns finished 8-8 in ’85 and put a scare in Miami. Miami was losing at halftime 21-3. Of course they are the Browns and they ended-up losing 24-21. No one gave them a chance and they almost pulled an upset.

hawkfan99337 says:Jan 3, 2011 12:56 AM

The Seahawks won. We won our division. We will win our first playoff game. Deal with it, because it may be next season, or it may be ten years down the road that it is your division. As long as the nfl has divisions, this scenario was a possibility. The Giants and Bucs can cry me river. And if your 12-4 team has to go on the road, maybe they should have handled there business better. Bottom line is the Seahawks won the games they had to win. The Seahawks won their division. Go to the nfl shop you will not find division champion merchandise for New Orleans, Green Bay, Baltimore, or the Jets. You know why? They didnt perform well enough to win the division.

What are every teams goals at training camp?
1. win division
2. secure a bye
3. secure home field
4. confrence champs
5. Super bowl games

The Seahawks accomplished goal number one! Great game Hawks, the Wild card game is in Seattle!!!

bnwpnw says:Jan 3, 2011 12:57 AM

The NFL establishment treated the Seahawks like gate-crashers when they were 13-3 and authoritatively marched their way to the Super Bowl.

Now that they ARE actual gate-crashers, I think they should own the role. A win next week vs. New Orleans would REALLY get everyone’s panties in a bunch.

Like most knee-jerk ideas, re-seeding is a pretty bad one. If this happens, the most common scenario we’ll see is, say, a 10-6 winner of a tough division having to go on the road against an 11-5 wild card with a weak schedule.

Look, so The Saints have to go on the road against an obvious crap team. That’s a pretty nice reward, you know?

The NFL should feel completely disgraced that something like this could happen. Giants and Bucs staying at home while a loser makes the playoffs, and has the home field to boot. lol Makes no sense whatsoever. Even if the NFL has to resort to drawing team names out of a hat, anything is better than the current system. I wonder just who it was that fell asleep at the switch…..

jeffperk: dont suck and beat the steelers twice and you would be hosting instead of crying.

hooterdawg says:Jan 3, 2011 1:21 AM

Many idiot posters ( and the suthor of this post) seem to forget that 4 teams are one and done in the WC round. If the Hawks lose, it is no embarrassment because they were not supposed to qualify even in the weak NFC West. In spite of the authors blustery opinion, there isn’t a lot of support to make any changes to the current system. There has never been a 7-9 team in the playoffs before, and probably couldn’t happen again for many many years. It was an anomoly. If playoff teams were seeded based upon record, perhaps the Hawks ‘lose’ to the Rams if they have to both sacrifice draft position and go on the road for their playoff game.

It was mathematically going to happen. This was the year. With Rams improving, Hawks getting some young guns, and 9ers dumping Singeltary, the NFC West will be one of the toughest divisions in a few years.

Boo Hoo bucaboo

Personally would have preferred the #8 pick in the draft, but nobody wanted the division so the Hawks are the winners. Oh Well

If the Yankees make playoffs with best record, and Red Sox make wildcard and have worst record, they are not allowed to play each other in the first rd, because they are in the same division. Is that fair?

=============================
No, that would be the upcoming labor stoppage. Then you’ll be getting Field Hockey.

as wack as an analogy as there ever was…the league is making billions in ad revenue. You think they care about your complaint?! Qwest is a blueprint for stadiums they eventually want around the league and WORLD, if possible (China, London)

Predict a very similar outcome as the first game in Week 11. Saints by 2 touchdowns. Even with their inconsistent play, the Saints can beat the Seahawks, easily. The Seahawks should NOT be in the playoffs, rather the Bucs and Giants are much better teams. It is a shame a losing record team is allowed to be crowned a Division champ…

If they beat the New Orleans Saints (who are not juggernauts AT ALL , (that would be new england) – I’ll laugh my a$% off. Didnt you know the Saints barely beat the 49ers…they have to travel to the West Coast on a short week, and they have no running game. Lets play the game just to be sure.

hawkalougie says:Jan 3, 2011 1:52 AM

boohoo!… been reading this site forever and finally decided to write something… I am an obvious Hawk fan and we get crap as we should! All teams with our record deserve their share of criticism. But we did what we were asked to and that was be better than those teams in our division as stated by the league for every division. Funny thing is, much like the afc south our division is very close to being the most competitive… Been down for long enough that all these teams need is a key piece and things will turn around.. So accept it.. we belong here and in a couple years WE will be the standard. Now to the second season where record doesn’t matter.

Oh and the NFC west has had 3 different teams in the Superbowl the last decade… talk about parody.

ladybucsandsteelersnut says:Jan 3, 2011 1:54 AM

I’d like for NBC to admit how bad their game choice sucked, but they probably won’t.

I’m a diehard football fan that plans my week… get the gametime off, and watch football…all…week…long. This is the first week that I got off of work, and, and watched something else, truly – Spoetscenter, the whole time.

If the Saints at 12-4 are so good and Seattle is so damn bad at 7-9 go into Seattle and win, if that seems so freaking hard then you’re not gonna go far in the playoffs. Oh yeah, Cool Breezy, enjoy playing in Seattle outside in January. This is not a good situation for the Saints.

discosucs2005 says:Jan 3, 2011 3:27 AM

I don’t think anyone is arguing that the Seahawks shouldn’t be in the playoffs, or a rule should be made that would keep a similar future team out. If they are arguing that, they are stupid. The NFL’s system is much better than the NBA’s NHL’s because they take divisions into consideration. It makes certain games more important.

As for dropping the team with a losing record out of a home game and making them go on the road, I don’t disagree. But I don’t see what good that will do. If the Saints lose to the Seahawks, does anyone think they would have gone to the Super Bowl? If you can’t beat a team with a losing record on the road, frankly, you have no reason to be in the playoffs either.

It sucks for the Bucs and the Giants, but this is no doubt going to be a unique case. It has only happened once so far, and it seems unlikely to happen again. Changing around the entire playoff structure because of this one case, while sounding like something the NFL would do, would probably end up being a stupid idea.

Somebody had to win the division baby and the Rams just aren’t ready. Pete Carroll has taken a team full of cast-offs and no-names and has made them more competitive than Mora ever dreamed of being.

If Hass plays next week, which could be his last in Seattle, I hope he plays the best game of his career.

1phd says:Jan 3, 2011 4:34 AM

Wait … you can’t on one hand say the Saints are a hundred times better and then claim it’s not fair they have to travel to Seattle. If they are that much better, does it really matter if they don’t have home field advantage? I say division winners get a home game, no matter what their record. If the Saints want to avoid having to travel, earn it by winning their division.

As bad as the Seahawks are — and they are historically bad — it doesn’t matter because unless they make it to round #2, round #1 is just a playoff runoff anyway. So the Saints beat them 38-7 and move on, who cares?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Fans in Seattle are laughing our butts off! All you lame bastards talking smack about Pete Carroll, he got us to the playoffs in a rebuilding year when it didn’t even matter!! Ha ha ha ha, I LOVE IT!!!

Seattle fans are finally vindicated for SuperBowl XL. The NFL forced us to watch a farce of a SuperBowl, that we had waited our entire lives for, and now you get to watch our farce of a team go to the playoffs.

Hope you Giants fans love it. Maybe if you had actually won your division you coulda been in the playoffs and beat us, but no, you suck, so that just ain’t gonna happen. HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!

Seattle doesn’t care what you jackrabbits think. Our entire city is laughing our butts off, and thanking Pete Carroll for getting us back to the playoffs. As for those who want to discuss draft position, yeah, whatever, that sure has seemed to help the Lambs a whole lot. HA HA HA HA!!!

SEATTLE LAUGHS AT THE NFL!!! Keep on whining you punks. Who’s whining now?

okiny says:Jan 3, 2011 5:37 AM

They are the best in the West, which is like saying they are the shiniest turd in the bowl. They are going to be as much fun to watch as UConn was.

biancaneri says:Jan 3, 2011 5:50 AM

There are a lot of people posting comments here that need to take a trip to the dictionary and learn the difference between “parity” and “parody”.

phillyforlife says:Jan 3, 2011 6:18 AM

buccaboo says: And in related news: The 10-6 Giants and Bucs will watch the game from home. What a joke!

_________________________________
Poor babies if ya want to be in the playoffs win your division its that simple and as for the Ginas please after blowing that game against the Eagles they dont deserve to be there and the comon the only winning team they beat all year was the saints and it good for them cause they will get an easy schedule next year they really are not that good!!!

joetoronto says:Jan 3, 2011 6:30 AM

You had to feel for Sam Bradford last night.

While the officials handed the game to the Seahawks, his HC, Steve Spagnuolo, didn’t challenge a damn thing and his receivers dropped everything in sight.

eagleswin says:Jan 3, 2011 6:41 AM

The turning point of the game was the Seahawks first drive where the ref called a phantom defensive holding call turned a Seahawks field goal into a TD. Those 4 points were huge in a tight game. That and a phantom seahawks first down ala the steelers a few games back where the ball was clearly down over a yard short of the marker. It’s on the Rams coach to challenge that but the reffing was horrible all night. A Rams defensive lineman was clearly held from behind that allowed another long run that the announcers were wondering how the refs missed again.

That said the Rams did themselves no favors with the ultra conservative playcalling and the receivers dropping balls. The Rams coach was also failed to throw the flag on some important calls that he most likely would have won.

jfd349 says:Jan 3, 2011 6:41 AM

Enough with this reseeding. If the NFL is going to do that, based on record, the the Colts (10-6) would travel to the Jets (11-5) and the Chiefs (10-6) would also travel to Baltimore (12-4)? Colts and Chiefs won their divisions, too.

And wouldn’t the Packers then host the Eagles if reseeding happened? They have same record but GB beat Philly in first game of season.

Perhaps the teams in the NFC South just got fat beating the NFC West (Atl 4-0 vs West) and Saints (3-1).

livenbreathefootball says:Jan 3, 2011 7:01 AM

I don’t want a knee jerk reseeding, but something has to be done. “Win your division.” Oh yeah sure. Except if you are a division with a perennial winner. Look at how many divisions had things all knotted up going into the final week. Someone was going to win, but that didn’t mean the other teams in the division sucked. Just that the winner beat the other really good teams in the division.

With the current system, someone has to win the AFC and NFC West which are incredibly weak divisions. Meanwhile good teams with winning records stay home just so a West division winner can go.

bspurloc says:Jan 3, 2011 8:18 AM

.
and they will beat the saints easily. as brees just sucks.

thingamajig says:Jan 3, 2011 8:46 AM

If it was any NFC or AFC east team winning their division with a 7-9 record this year it wouldn’t be a problem.

realitypolice says:Jan 3, 2011 8:50 AM

@hawkfan99337:

Your team sucks. At least 20 NFL teams would have blown that horrible Seahawks team off the field last night.

Seahawks players putting on their “division champion” hats on the field last night has was an 11 on the unintentional comedy scale.

As far as the fan of a 7-9 team telling a 12-4 team “they should have handled their business better” (I fixed your typo- you’re welcome); how you could type that with a straight face is beyond me.

I wanted to sue NBC for forcing me to watch that game last night. My retinas are still hurting.

Congratulations on being the first double digit home underdog in playoff history.

I actually have no issue with the Hawks being in the playoffs- they won their division.

But hearing Hawk fan trash talking teams that are so much better than them that they are practically playing a different sport- that’s just pure comedy gold.

Make sure to come back here next Monday to take your beating like a man, hawkfan99337.

realitypolice says:Jan 3, 2011 9:00 AM

dallastrojan says:
Jan 3, 2011 12:42 AM
Throw the records out the window, ladies. Someone had to win the division, and the Seahawks won it. Division champs. Who gives a crap about their regular season record. Bring on the Saints. Congrats to Pete Carroll! Scoreboard.
======================

Yeah- the scoreboard says that the worst team ever to make the playoffs in NFL history lost 9 games by an average of 21 points. Three touchdowns. On average. Yup.

The on field presentation of the division championship hats was a nice touch, though.

Your boys are about to learn the difference between beating a team with a rookie QB and no wide receiver that can get open more than 7 yards down the field and a playoff tested super bowl champion with a 12-4 record pissed about having to go on the road to play a team full of players who couldn’t have made their roster.

There have been 357 Division Champs in the NFL.
Only twice have teams with .500 records made it in.
Yesterday a team with a losing record made it for the 1st time.

Last year the owners voted on changing the playoff selection process just to avoid this very scenario.
(You can win your division, but it will take a .500 or better record to advance to the playoffs)

That vote fell only only 4 votes short. – last year…
My guess is they’ll reconsider it again this off-season only this time it will be approved with no problems.
I mean seriously, who wants to see some 7-9 scrub team in the playoffs who only made it because their entire division stinks?

I felt sorry for Bradford last night, those receivers dropped a ton of passes even though he put the ball where it needed to be. St. Louis needs to get that kid some guys that can catch the ball and then look out. The ‘hawks have no reason to be hosting a playoff game, but they should be in the post season, they won their division. If you don’t think they should be there, you also think we should just blow up the divisional approach and just pick the top 6 from each conference, not good either, you would lose all the rivalries. This is the most wonderful time of the year, the NFL post season. Savor it, it will be gone before we know it. Go Packers!!

xtb3 says:Jan 3, 2011 10:43 AM

only sure loser next week

enkinan says:Jan 3, 2011 10:49 AM

If they do seeding they might as well drop the whole pretense of divisions and just have teams play 17 different opponents. It sucks that either one of those non-playoff caliber teams got in, but without divisions a lot of rivalries die a horrible death.

dallasbaby says:Jan 3, 2011 10:51 AM

I don’t understand why everyone is crying about this. They had the luck of playing in a weak division, which they won. Plenty of first seeded teams have gone one and done, several wild-carders have made it to the Superbowl.

I think it’s cool and interesting that a team that otherwise would have no chance in the postseason made it because they won their division. It breaks up the monotony of your perennial playoff teams like New England, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis. It’s something different and I’m all for it.

Clearly I’m in the minority but I don’t think this rule should be changed. Of course some divisions are more competitive and boast more talented teams. Seattle was the best of the worst and the Rams put on a wretched showing last night. Why begrudge a city who was cheated out of Superbowl XL by pro-Pittsburgh refs? Welcome back to the Playoffs.

hooterdawg says:Jan 3, 2011 11:09 AM

“The Rams won’t get a playoff game after this surprising 7-9 season, but it doesn’t matter. They are the only team in the division with a franchise quarterback and they get a much better draft pick now. (Seattle falls from No. 8 to No. 21 at best. The Rams get No. 14.) Unless the goal is to lose in the first round, this Rams loss wasn’t a killer.”

Has anything dumber ever been written? It doesn’t matter to lose the division title? I bet a lot of Rams fans feel differently. Just a stupid analysis.

hawkfan99337 says:Jan 3, 2011 11:54 AM

@realitypolice

First I never claimed that my team was great or that there were not a handful of teams that would have beaten us last night. I dont know how you read the NFL schedule but the way i understand it you only play one team a week. Who cares if other teams could or could not have beaten the Hawks last week? We beat the team the NFL schedule makers put in front of us.

Secondly about the 7-9 team telling the 12-4 team that they needed to handle there business better. I still assume you are talking about the Baltimore Ravens, so look back to week 2 at the 4-12 Bengals, how did that divisional game for you? Lost 15-10? How about week 13 hosting the Steelers? Lost 13-10? What ever happened to winning your home games and beating the teams you are suppose to beat on the road? OH, i see you didnt take care of your business to win the division. You know what you get? A road game!! Here is the great thing about being a Suprise division champion, and i do mean suprise because if you go back to August and look at all the predictions this was San Francisco’s division, Arizona, then Seattle. We were picked to go 4-12. So the Seahawks are playing with house money, and the Seahawks won the games we were suppose to win. And on top of that we beat Chargers, the Bears, and won in Arizona.

NBC didnt force you to watch that game last night and if you are a true nfl fan i am suprised it hurt you as bad as you claim it did. I can recall Collinsworth and Michaels commenting on well played a game it was. Maybe you should have changed the channel to one of those reality shows.

As far as the first double digit home underdog is concerned I dont care. Thats for the betters, and the line will move during the week. Keep in mind that the line means absolutely nothing come Sunday. Remember that at Super Bowl IV the Vikings were favored by 13, and in the NFC playoffs a few years back Carolina was favored by 9.5 over the Arizona Cardinals, both favorites lost. Or to bring up some Seahawks history remember 1983? Dolphins and Dan Marino favored at home in the playoffs to beat Dave Krieg and the measley Seattle Seahawks. We won that game too.

To clarify for you I wasnt trash talking a 12-4 team. I was trash talking an idiot fan of a 12-4 Wild card team that was whinning his team had to play on the road. When a Division champion 7-9 team got to host a playoff game.

hawkfan99337 says:Jan 3, 2011 11:55 AM

@reality police.

I will be on here next week.

cubEbear54 says:Jan 3, 2011 1:38 PM

thingamajig says:
Jan 3, 2011 8:46 AM
If it was any NFC or AFC east team winning their division with a 7-9 record this year it wouldn’t be a problem.
======================

+1

philrat says:Jan 3, 2011 1:57 PM

It’s pathetic that a 7-9 team makes the playoffs while two 10-6 teams don’t in the NFC. The playoffs should be the best football. Shouldn’t have a lousy team just because they are lucky enough to be in a lousy division this year. A joke!!!

I’m not a seahawks fan (eagles fan) but THEY WON THE DIVISION!!!
THIS IS WHY WE HAVE DIVISIONS!!!
If you win the division you get a home game…if you dont like it then WIN YOUR DIVISION and dont settle for a wildcard. The saints are visiting because they couldnt take care of biz in their division!!!

cubEbear54 says:Jan 3, 2011 2:49 PM

hawkfan99337 for Commish!! Way to intelligently and practically state the facts and introduce some common sense into this discussion. Well done!

cubEbear54 says:Jan 3, 2011 3:05 PM

dallasbaby says: I don’t understand why everyone is crying about this. They had the luck of playing in a weak division, which they won. Plenty of first seeded teams have gone one and done, several wild-carders have made it to the Superbowl.
======================
Also well said! As a fellow football fan, I couldn’t agree with you more. I love the diversity of the teams during playoffs. I feel bad for the Bucs because they were truly the most improved team this year. But you gotta work toward it all season & not cross your fingers that another team will help you in. That rule should not be changed. Does that not also “wussify” football by “handing out” rewards not earned?

terumiarai says:Jan 3, 2011 3:36 PM

The NFL should be restructured into:
NFC East
NFC West
AFC East
AFC West

This way there will be only 2 divisions in each conference creating better balance for playoff teams that really deserve to be in the playoffs.

edgarpoe2 says:Jan 3, 2011 3:43 PM

discosucs2005 says:
Jan 3, 2011 3:27 AM
I don’t think anyone is arguing that the Seahawks shouldn’t be in the playoffs, or a rule should be made that would keep a similar future team out.
——————————
I am arguing that very point. But I’m not saying blow up the divisions per se. Just make it a rule that any team has to win their respective division AND have a .500 plus record to be playoff bound. You really think a 7-9 team ever deserves postseason just because they are lucky enough to play in a weak division?

mrcowpatty says:Jan 3, 2011 4:34 PM

I wanted the Rams but I’ll take the Sea hawks at 7-9. If by chance they win the Super Bowl, it’ll show everyone how irrelevant the NFL season really is.
Just like the NBA and the NHL.

bikerhal says:Jan 3, 2011 4:42 PM

As a faithful Saints fan, I don’t like the matchup. We had three offensive stars sidelined for the game yesterday, and lost three more stars in the first quarter. Throw in a short week, travel to the west coast, and all the pressure to win being put on the Saints, and well. . . I ain’t so sure it is a done deal. If it was best of three, then I would relax, but in one game, anything can happen.

To the poster who said “Brees Sucks”, my reply is: “really?” If you are going to post your reasons for predicting the outcome, at least use some reason or logic. Win or lose, Brees has proven his value.

cubEbear54 says:Jan 3, 2011 4:46 PM

edgarpoe2 says:
Jan 3, 2011 12:38 AM
Even if the Seahawks get lucky and go all the way to the Super Bowl, it is a disgrace, because they shouldn’t even have had the chance. A 7-9 team should never be allowed to advance when two 10-6 teams stay home.
================
But if that 7-9 team makes it to the SB, doesn’t that prove that they are good enough to be in the hunt and not “lucky”? It means they’ve knocked out teams with better records & advanced. This is why the games are played.

I get the point that’s being said about the “weak” divisions. But they may not always be weak divisions. Teams are always cutting, hiring, restructuring, planning better, etc. A weak division this year could be a pretty forceful division in the future. Would you still be saying “Just make it a rule that any team has to win their respective division AND have a .500 plus record to be playoff bound.” if your team winds up in a weak division with a 7-9 record? Would that be a disgrace? Not being confrontational, I’m really curious about your answer.

bikerhal says:Jan 3, 2011 5:03 PM

tatum064 said:
“If they beat the New Orleans Saints (who are not juggernauts AT ALL , (that would be new england) – I’ll laugh my a$% off. Didnt you know the Saints barely beat the 49ers…they have to travel to the West Coast on a short week, and they have no running game. Lets play the game just to be sure.”

To cite the results of a game that happened two months ago in making your case, is illogical. Everyone knows teams evolve as the season progresses. Sometimes they get better, some times worse. Yes, the Saints struggled against the 49’ers in week 3, but convincinly beat the Steelers recently and the Falcons just over a week ago in their own stadium.

The argument on reseeding has merits on both sides. For the NFL, they want to generate fan interest and put the best teams on display in the playoffs. On the other hand, Americans love the underdog, and so it may draw even more fan interest to watch this game. As previously stated, I am a Saints fan and I don’t like having to play a desperate underdog with a chip on their shoulder. I prefer the underdog role. It worked well for us against the Colts last year.

For those arguing that if indeed the Saints are far superior why is it a big deal to play the Hawks, the answer is the game means more travel on a short week. Ha! If the Saints lose, the Falcons will have to throw out their game planning for the Saints and quickly bone up on Seattle!! The underdog is a good role! Nothing to lose and everything to gain.

llachglin says:Jan 3, 2011 5:50 PM

This fair-weather Seahawks fan, who only watches if the team makes the playoffs (or on other rare occasions such as the last ten clock minutes of Sunday’s game), is ROTFLMAO.

The league and the sports media screw the West Coast with their focus on East Coast teams.They have a history of ignoring even the very good Seattle teams. The league moved the Seahawks out of their traditional division in the AFC West, ending long-time rivalries that brought out the fans (St. Louis and San Francisco will never match the Broncos and Raiders). Then, when a clearly superior Seattle team finally made it to the Superbowl, the media and league devoted all their attention to the Steelers, who had the game handed the game to them on a silver platter by crappy officiating. After that it’s amazing anyone in Seattle gives a crap at all.

After all that, making the playoffs with a losing record and embarassing everyone is nothing but poetic justice. The Seahawks will probably get crushed on Saturday but I’ll be watching and hoping for a miracle Super Bowl run. Every minute that Seattle takes draining resources from the league in reduced ad revenue is a major victory. And even if the NFL benefits by the drama of a deep run they’ll just have to eat crow. It’s a no-lose situation, and well worth losing a high draft pick.

As for divisions, sports have them for all the reasons already mentioned by others. Whining about the outcome is pretty juvenile.

Even if the Seahawks were 9-7, their would still potentially be two teams that are 10-6 and not making the playoffs. It’s the same principle. It doesn’t change a thing if they had a winning record or a losing record. It just looks uglier. I personally hope the Seahawks beat the 10-6 Saints so I can say the Saints didn’t deserve to make the playoffs. Don’t blame the Hawks for playing football. Blame the league for not fully thinking things out.

bikerhal says:Jan 4, 2011 6:52 PM

hawker75 said:
“I personally hope the Seahawks beat the 10-6 Saints so I can say the Saints didn’t deserve to make the playoffs.”

Ah, . . . small point of order, but the Saints are 11-5, and pulled their starters in the beginning of the 4th quarter against the Bucs or they could possibly be 12-4.

These were the same playoff rules that we started the season. They didn’t change the rules to let Seattle in. Just because it was Seattle, they didn’t change the rule in their favor.

Let me cite some Rule changing and why it is much worse..

Tuck Rule because it was Tom Brady and the Patriots.

Couldn’t determine who got the fumble from Roethlisberger, so it must be Roehlisberger’s ball.

Those are rule changes. Nobody sorts out or does instant replay on other fumbles to make sure their was a clear winner of the fumble. The winner is the last man with the football period.

We should be complaining about Pittsburgh having a home playoff game, not Seattle.

snarkygurl says:Jan 6, 2011 4:20 PM

bikerhal says:
Jan 4, 2011 6:52 PM
hawker75 said:
“I personally hope the Seahawks beat the 10-6 Saints so I can say the Saints didn’t deserve to make the playoffs.

Ah, . . . small point of order, but the Saints are 11-5, and pulled their starters in the beginning of the 4th quarter against the Bucs or they could possibly be 12-4.
=======================
Um, bikerhal? Small point of order, but weren’t the Saints down by a TD when they started sitting starters? And wasn’t it late in the 4th before Brees took the bench?

mikejonesforum says:Jan 6, 2011 7:16 PM

Dear NFL Competition Committee,

If an NFL team that has a losing record can host a playoff game against a team it lost to in head to head competition and possesses more losses than its opponent, we should open up the playoffs to every team except Carolina. This is ridiculous and must be changed.

Here’s what you need to fix-

You must have a winning record to win a division and to qualify for a playoff birth. The playoffs are for winning teams, not the 7-9 Seahawks.

That’s right, I said it! Seattle should be sitting at home this Saturday without a division title.

Also, don’t add two more regular season games. Remove one preseason game and add two more playoff seeds to each conference. Who knows what Tampa or the Giants could have done in the playoffs this year? Maybe everyone would have had to kiss Coughlin’s ass in Dallas.

The headline should read, “Say GOOD-BYE to your first 7-9 playoff team” because its going to be a bloodbath and New Orleans will be wielding the axe.

Oh noooo…the Saints are down their two running backs!! Whatever will they do? Uhhh…the same thing they always do. Pull a couple of guys off the practice squad (like Ivory and Thomas) and embarrass opposing defenses.

I love all the talk about an upset. What a joke. The Saints won 6 in a row with a patch work of RBs. Julius Jones will be looking to make a statement against the team that cut him, and Reggie Bush, the ultimate decoy, is back full strength. I’m a Patriots fan, and if there is a coach in this league who knows how to use the talents of the players he HAS its Bill Bellicheck….and Sean Payton. They will destroy Seattle folks. Saints 38-Hawks 13